Do you still need "satellites" installed indoors to work? Because then you'd have to convince every business that this cost has a direct positive effect on their sales.

A lot of brick and mortar stores are based on the assumption that a lost customer will buy more things, so I don't see this happening.

▲

rtutz 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Think about how this information could be used. As a store owner you can precisely track movement of customers and optimize the shop layout.

BT hardware is also rather affordable.

▲

AlotOfReading 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You're already tracked like that. I was building solutions to do it well over a decade ago. One customer was well known for their mouse themed hats. A famous hotel brand in a well known casino city used it to track employees instead. I no longer do that for obvious ethical reasons.

There may be a rare few legitimate uses for improving the accuracy, but it also makes those privacy nightmares worse.

▲

kenhwang 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My previous employer already had a product offering that could do this for a better part of a decade by triangulating with WiFi/BLE and cross referencing with surveillance footage. It was deployed in malls and retail chains.

It generated interesting information, but not interesting enough to be profitable.

We weren't the only ones with this capability either, most major retailers had this level of analytics through surveillance footage that previously existed for loss prevention purposes. Then simply link the data to a rewards number or credit card and you got a stable tracking identity.

▲

porridgeraisin 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> loss prevention

So preventing theft?

	▲	meindnoch 11 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		No, loss prevention. :) "Theft" is such a value-loaded, moralizing term. It collapses a wide spectrum of socioeconomic realities into a single criminalized label, ignoring the structural inequities that often shape people's choices. When we say "loss prevention", we're deliberately reframing the conversation away from individual blame and toward systems, environments, and institutional responsibility. Loss prevention isn't about vilifying people - it's about acknowledging that harm occurs within a broader context. It centers the idea that organizations can design safer, more equitable spaces that minimize material loss without resorting to punitive narratives rooted in classism, racism, and centuries-old assumptions about who is "dangerous". Calling something "theft" externalizes accountability onto the most vulnerable actors; calling it "loss" recognizes that institutions have agency, too. And preventing that loss focuses on proactive, compassionate strategies rather than reactive punishment.

▲

jacquesm 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

And guess what, that shop layout is not going to be optimized for the customer's convenience, but for the shop's profits. These kind of solutions tend to converge on the 'Hotel California' model: you can enter, but you can no longer leave.

▲

jacquesm 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Indeed, screw IKEA.

▲

atoav 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Maybe US IKEA is different from European ones, but there are literally arrows on the floor that guide you through the whole thing? Follow the arrows and you're out.

	▲	jacquesm 23 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		No, they don't guide you to the exit, they guide you past the collection. The whole point is that the thing is set up like a very long serpentine track so that you 'see everything' rather than that you can go to the one thing you want and then to the cash register. This is because they - rightly - figure that if they can keep you in the store longer and expose you to more stuff you might buy more.